public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Timothy D. Witham" <wookie@osdlab.org>
To: Linux Kernel List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: a quest for a better scheduler
Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2001 11:06:03 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20010406110603.A1599@osdlab.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20010404151632.A2144@kochanski> <18230000.986424894@hellman> <20010405153841.A2452@osdlab.org>
In-Reply-To: <20010405153841.A2452@osdlab.org>; from wookie@osdlab.org on Thu, Apr 05, 2001 at 03:38:41PM -0700

Timothy D. Witham wrote :
[...]
> I propose that we work on setting up a straight forward test harness   
> that allows developers to quickly test a kernel patch against 
> various performance yardsticks.

[...
(proposed large server testbeds)
...]


  OK, so I have received some feedback on my proposal to provide a 
reference set of machines so that any kernel modifications could be 
checked across a range of machines and a range of tests.  It was 
pointed out that there are lots of smaller servers out there and 
they should be part of any test plan.  There was also some concern 
that a 4 way server didn't add any value in a test lineup. But I 
have to think that with the number of 4 ways out there they should 
be included.

  One additional piece of feedback was that any comprehensive 
characterization plan should include desktops, tablet devices and 
older machines and the performance tests that address those 
configurations usage models and I agree that it is something that 
needs to be done. But as for providing hardware for that effort the
OSDL is not the group to do that.  Hopefully somebody with an 
interest in these configurations will step forward to do that 
portion of the job.

So the server hardware configurations have evolved to look like 
the following.

	1 way, 512 MB,   2 IDE
	2 way,   1 GB,  10 SCSI (1 SCSI channel)
	4 way,   4 GB,  20 SCSI (2 channels) 
	8 way,   8 GB,  40 SCSI (4 channels) maybe Fibre Channel (FC)
       16 way,  16 GB,  80 FC   (8 channels)

The types of server applications that I have heard people express concern are:

   Web infrastructure: 
	Apache                        (SPECWEB99???)
	TUX                           (SPECWEB99???)
	Jabber                        (have their own)

   Corporate infrastructure: 
	NFS                           (SPECSFS2.0???)
	raw TCP/IP performance
	Samba                         (Have their own)
	email                         (SPECMAIL2001???)

   Database performance: 
	 Raw storage I/O performance  (various)
	 OLTP workload                (something like TPC-C???)
	 OLAP workload

   General usage: 
	compile speed (usually measured by kernel compile)

  
Further comments?  I will start contacting folks who have expressed
interest.
-- 
Timothy D. Witham - Lab Director - wookie@osdlab.org
Open Source Development Lab Inc - A non-profit corporation
15275 SW Koll Parkway - Suite H - Beaverton OR, 97006
(503)-626-2455 x11 (office)    (503)-702-2871     (cell)
(503)-626-2455     (fax)


  parent reply	other threads:[~2001-04-06 18:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 44+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2001-04-04 14:03 a quest for a better scheduler Hubertus Franke
2001-04-04 13:23 ` Ingo Molnar
2001-04-04 22:16   ` Tim Wright
2001-04-04 22:54     ` Christopher Smith
2001-04-05 22:38       ` Timothy D. Witham
2001-04-06  3:27         ` Christopher Smith
2001-04-06 18:06         ` Timothy D. Witham [this message]
2001-04-06 21:08           ` Michael Peddemors
2001-04-06 22:33           ` Nathan Straz
2001-04-04 15:12 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2001-04-04 15:49   ` Khalid Aziz
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2001-04-18 14:50 Yoav Etsion
2001-04-06 13:15 Hubertus Franke
2001-04-05 23:53 Torrey Hoffman
2001-04-05 23:01 Hubertus Franke
2001-04-04 19:06 Hubertus Franke
2001-04-04 17:17 Hubertus Franke
2001-04-04 15:36 Hubertus Franke
2001-04-04 15:28 Hubertus Franke
2001-04-04 13:43 Hubertus Franke
2001-04-04 13:25 ` Ingo Molnar
2001-04-04 13:34 ` Ingo Molnar
2001-04-04 15:08   ` Andrea Arcangeli
2001-04-04 15:44 ` Khalid Aziz
2001-04-04  6:36 alad
2001-04-03  2:23 Fabio Riccardi
2001-04-03  8:55 ` Ingo Molnar
2001-04-03 19:13   ` Mike Kravetz
2001-04-03 18:47     ` Ingo Molnar
2001-04-03 22:43       ` Mike Kravetz
2001-04-04  0:18         ` Fabio Riccardi
2001-04-04  2:47           ` Mike Kravetz
2001-04-04  4:21             ` Fabio Riccardi
2001-04-04 17:27               ` Mike Kravetz
2001-04-04  6:53           ` Ingo Molnar
2001-04-04 16:12             ` Davide Libenzi
2001-04-04  6:28         ` Ingo Molnar
2001-04-03 12:31 ` Alan Cox
2001-04-04  0:33   ` Fabio Riccardi
2001-04-04  0:35     ` Alan Cox
2001-04-04  1:17       ` Fabio Riccardi
2001-04-04  1:50         ` Christopher Smith
2001-04-04 11:57       ` Ingo Molnar
2001-04-04 11:51     ` Ingo Molnar

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20010406110603.A1599@osdlab.org \
    --to=wookie@osdlab.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox